Everything that George Osborne did this week will make life harder for savers
and pensioners.

Was this the worst Budget ever for savers? Despite announcing that it would be "a Budget for those who want to save for their retirement" at the start of his speech on Wednesday, there wasn't a single measure from the Chancellor to help alleviate the problems facing the prudent.

Worse still, the technical details buried in the small print of the statement signal that savers should be braced for years of rock-bottom interest rates and higher inflation eroding the value of their money.

Savers should be under no illusion about the severity of the problem. While people in Cyprus faced the prospect of their government overtly raiding their bank accounts this week, in Britain it has been done by far more stealthy means.

According to figures from Save Our Savers, a campaign group, British depositors have lost more than £43bn in the "real" value of their savings over the past four years. For the average saver, this translates into a loss of £2,500 in real terms - as inflation has run ahead of the interest rates paid by the vast majority of deposit accounts.

The picture is equally bleak for pensioners, many of whom are on fixed incomes and rely on the interest on savings to supplement a pension. Andrew Tully, a director of MGM Advantage, the annuity firm, said: "Despite the reaffirmation of an inflation target of 2pc, inflation figures issued on the eve of the Budget show prices rising at a far higher rate, and this will continue for the foreseeable future. As a result, pensioners can expect their incomes to halve in real terms over the next 20 years."

He added that households effectively needed to find an additional £704 to maintain the standard of living they enjoyed just 12 months ago. And the host of measures announced on Wednesday suggests that this "savings gulf" can only widen further.

For a start, the Government has said it is considering an extension to the Funding for Lending scheme, which provides banks with access to cheap finance. This scheme has caused a catastrophic collapse in savings rates. Since its introduction in August the rates paid on savings accounts have fallen by a staggering 40pc - the best instant-access account then paid 3.25pc, according to SavingsChampion.co.uk; now the best rate is 2pc, but with withdrawal restrictions.

The Budget also proposed giving the Bank of England a far more flexible remit, which means it may no longer be charged solely with keeping inflation at 2pc (a target that it has spectacularly failed to meet in recent years). This raises the prospect of far less stringent controls on inflation, helping erode government debts but also having the same "vanishing" effect on people's savings and pensions.

Rather than focusing on just inflation, the Bank may prioritise long-term low interest rates and be given extended powers to continue its money-printing programme in a bid to reinvigorate the economy.

Simon Ward, an economist at Henderson, said: "Rather than admonishing the Bank of England for failing to maintain the real value of money, the Chancellor is encouraging it to remain relaxed about a sustained inflation overshoot and indulge in further monetary experimentation." Against this background he said the Chancellor's claim to be helping savers was "Orwellian".

Ros Altmann, a pensions expert, said: "All this suggests that interest rates will stay at exceptionally low levels for even longer. This extends the pain for savers, as negative real returns persist." She said she was disappointed that George Osborne had failed even to acknowledge the problems his policies have caused for savers.

For example, stating that Funding for Lending is a clear "success" is only half the picture. It has driven down mortgage costs, but at a price for savers, a point acknowledged by the Treasury Select Committee.

Ms Altmann added: "We heard no real rhetoric about the value of saving, or any acknowledgement of the suffering savers have endured. Quite the opposite: the Chancellor made it clear in this Budget that he wants you to borrow more."

The main thrust of the Budget's recovery plan is a gamble on house prices booming again. But there is no counterpoint, however small, to help those who don't want or need to borrow huge sums and are focused on building a nest egg for their future instead.

All this is a far cry from the promises the Conservatives made in opposition, when Mr Osborne and David Cameron pledged to kick-start Britain's savings habit once again.

The only crumb of comfort was the news that the single-tier state pension and the new cap on long-term care costs will be introduced a year early, in 2016. John Porteous of accountants RSM Tenon said a flat-rate pension of £144 a week should benefit the self-employed, women and lower earners and should reduce the "means-test trap".

In other words, every pound saved into a pension should boost overall retirement income, not replace state benefits. Of course, the only problem is that this pound may be worth a lot less by the time you retire.

Mr Porteous added: "There is no new incentive for individuals to save for their retirement, a massive long-term problem. The cost of retirement is going up and self-funding is the only way to bridge that gap – but with so many increasing demands on the household budget, pensions need to be made more attractive, not less."

What can savers do to protect their assets? For those who are years from retirement, the message is clear: stay clear of cash. If you can afford to shoulder the risk, you need to look at real assets, such as equities or even gold, that have the potential to keep pace with inflation over time. However, such advice comes with a strong "wealth warning": the value of your capital is likely to be far more volatile.

For those in retirement the options may be limited. People approaching retirement may want to consider options such as income drawdown, under which their pension remains invested, or annuities that offer some inflation protection. But these are expensive and will reduce the initial income received.

The other option is to move savings regularly to ensure you get the best rate possible, however meagre it may seem.

A look at the full transcript of the Budget "Red Book" reveals Mr Osborne's real priorities. In the 112-page document the term "savers" occurs only once – but even here it refers to savers overseas, not those struggling at home.

'It’s not worth having cash savings at the moment’

Charlotte Slater (above) said she was “disappointed” that there wasn’t anything in the Budget for her and her husband, Paul, writes Mikkel Stern-Peltz.

The couple, from Nottingham, are keen to put aside what they can for their children, Jacob, six, and Eva, three.

But Ms Slater said it was “really not worth having cash savings at the moment” because the rates were so low. Instead, they have invested in a stocks and shares Isa. She added: “We’ve lost our child benefit, and fuel bills have gone up and up.

“We could do with every penny, but there wasn’t really anything to help us in this Budget.”